Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 73 / Friday, April 15, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 21239 

(1) The sale, distribution, and use of 

this device are restricted to prescription 

use in accordance with § 801.109 of this 

chapter. 

(2) The labeling must include specific 

instructions regarding the proper 

placement and use of the device. 

(3) The device must be demonstrated 

to be biocompatible. 

(4) Mechanical bench testing of 

material strength must demonstrate that 

the device will withstand forces 

encountered during use. 

(5) Safety and effectiveness data must 

demonstrate that the device prevents 

hemorrhoids in women undergoing 

spontaneous vaginal delivery, in 

addition to general controls. 

Dated: April 11, 2011. 

David Dorsey, 

Acting Deputy Commissioner for Policy, 

Planning and Budget. 

[FR Doc. 2011–9141 Filed 4–14–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4160–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

28 CFR Parts 0 and 51 

[CRT Docket No. 120; AG Order No. 3262– 

2011] 

Revision of Voting Rights Procedures 

AGENCY: Civil Rights Division, 

Department of Justice. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Attorney General finds it 

necessary to revise the Department of 

Justice’s ‘‘Procedures for the 

Administration of section 5 of the 

Voting Rights Act of 1965.’’ The 

revisions are needed to clarify the scope 

of section 5 review based on recent 

amendments to section 5, make 

technical clarifications and updates, and 

provide better guidance to covered 

jurisdictions and interested members of 

the public concerning current 

Department practices. Proposed revised 

Procedures were published for comment 

on June 11, 2010, and a 60-day comment 

period was provided. 

DATES: The rule will be effective on 

April 15, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: T. 

Christian Herren, Jr., Chief, Voting 

Section, Civil Rights Division, United 

States Department of Justice, Room 

7254–NWB, 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, 

NW., Washington, DC 20530, or by 

telephone at (800) 253–3931. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 

1965, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 1973c, 

requires certain jurisdictions (listed in 

the Appendix) to obtain ‘‘preclearance’’ 

from either the United States District 

Court for the District of Columbia or the 

United States Attorney General before 

implementing any new standard, 

practice, or procedure that affects 

voting. 

Procedures for the Attorney General’s 

Administration of section 5 were first 

published in 1971. Proposed Procedures 

were published for comment on May 28, 

1971 (36 FR 9781), and the final 

Procedures were published on 

September 10, 1971 (36 FR 18186). As 

a result of the Department’s experience 

under the 1971 Procedures, changes 

mandated by the 1975 Amendments to 

the Voting Rights Act, and 

interpretations of section 5 contained in 

judicial decisions, proposed revised 

Procedures were published for comment 

on March 21, 1980 (45 FR 18890), and 

final revised Procedures were published 

on January 5, 1981 (46 FR 870) 

(corrected at 46 FR 9571, Jan. 29, 1981). 

As a result of further experience under 

the 1981 Procedures, specifically with 

respect to redistricting plans adopted 

following the 1980 Census, changes 

mandated by the 1982 Amendments to 

the Voting Rights Act, and judicial 

decisions in cases involving section 5, 

revised Procedures were published for 

comment on May 6, 1985 (50 FR 19122), 

and final revised Procedures were 

published on January 6, 1987 (52 FR 

486). 

In the twenty-four years since the 

previous revisions became final, the 

Attorney General has had further 

experience in the consideration of 

voting changes; the courts have issued 

a number of important decisions in 

cases involving section 5, and Congress 

enacted the 2006 amendments to the 

Voting Rights Act. This new revision 

reflects these developments. 

Comments 

In response to the Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (‘‘Notice’’) published on 

June 11, 2010 (75 FR 33205), we 

received comments from or on behalf of 

two national public interest 

organizations, one research and 

educational institution, one national 

political organization composed of 

attorneys, and one individual. All 

comments received are available for 

inspection and copying at 

www.regulations.gov and at the Voting 

Section, Civil Rights Division, 

Department of Justice, Washington DC 

20530. 

The comments received expressed 

diverse views and were of great 

assistance in the preparation of these 

final revisions to the Procedures. The 

final revised Procedures reflect our 

consideration of the comments as well 

as further consideration of sections or 

topics that were not the subject of 

comments. 

Section 51.2 Definitions 

The purpose of the revision to the 

definition of ‘‘change affecting voting’’ or 

‘‘change’’ is to clarify the definition of 

the benchmark standard, practice, or 

procedure. One commenter 

recommended we revise this section to 

reflect that the benchmark is the 

standard, practice, or procedure in force 

or effect at the time of the submission 

or the last legally enforceable standard, 

practice, or procedure in force or effect 

in the jurisdiction. We have concluded 

that no further revision of this section 

is warranted. The Voting Section’s 

practice is to compare the proposed 

standard, practice, or procedure to the 

benchmark. Generally, the benchmark is 

the standard, practice, or procedure that 

has been: (1) Unchanged since the 

jurisdiction’s coverage date; or (2) if 

changed since that date, found to 

comply with section 5 and ‘‘in force or 

effect.’’ Riley v. Kennedy, 553 U.S. 406, 

421 (2008); Procedures for the 

Administration of Section 5 of the 

Voting Rights Act of 1965, 28 CFR 

51.54. Where there is an unsubmitted 

intervening change, the Attorney 

General will make no determination 

concerning the submitted change 

because of the prior unsubmitted 

change. In such instances, it is our 

practice to inform the jurisdiction there 

is a prior related change that has not 

been submitted and that simultaneous 

review is required. A standard, practice, 

or procedure that has been reviewed 

and determined to meet section 5 

standards is considered to be in force or 

effect, even if the jurisdiction never 

implements the change because the 

change is effective as a matter of federal 

law and was available for use. 

Section 51.3 Delegation of Authority 

The purpose of the revisions to the 

delegation of authority is to make 

technical corrections to the delegation 

of authority from the Attorney General 

to the Assistant Attorney General, and 

from the Chief of the Voting Section to 

supervisory attorneys within the Voting 

Section, and to conform the Procedures 

to other parts of Title 28. Two 

commenters objected to the revisions, 

expressing concern that the delegation 

of the functions of the Chief to 

supervisory attorneys in the Voting 

Section results in the delegation of 

section 5 legal review authority to nonpolitically appointed attorneys 

subordinate to the Section Chief. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
21240 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 73 / Friday, April 15, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

The concerns of these commenters are 

unfounded. The delegation of authority 

in these Procedures is similar to existing 

delegations. For example, pursuant to 

the appendix to 28 CFR Part 0, Subpart 

J, the Chief may authorize the Deputy 

Chief to act on his or her behalf. 

Moreover, under the revised Procedures, 

the Chief needs the concurrence of the 

Assistant Attorney General, who is a 

presidential appointee, to designate 

supervisory attorneys to perform section 

5 functions. Accordingly, we decline to 

revise the section further. 

Section 51.9 Computation of Time 

The purpose of the revisions to this 

section is to clarify that the review 

period commences when a submission 

is received by the Department officials 

responsible for conducting section 5 

reviews and to clarify the date of the 

response. 

One commenter objected to the 

commencement of the 60-day review 

period upon receipt of the submission 

by the Voting Section or the Office of 

the Assistant Attorney General of the 

Civil Rights Division as an unwarranted 

extension of the 60-day review period. 

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 

provide for the designation of a 

Department clerical employee to receive 

summonses on behalf of the Attorney 

General. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(i)(1)(A)(i). 

Similarly, and for the same purpose of 

prompt and efficient routing, the 

Attorney General has designated both 

the Voting Section and the Office of the 

Assistant Attorney General of the Civil 

Rights Division as the proper recipients 

for section 5 submissions. 

The Department has made one 

additional edit to this section. As set 

forth in the Notice and as described 

below, a second paragraph is being 

added to § 51.37 (Obtaining information 

from the submitting authority). To 

ensure consistency, the reference to 

§ 51.37, contained in previous versions 

of the Procedures, is amended to 

§ 51.37(b), 

Section 51.13 Examples of Changes 

The purpose of this revision is to 

clarify that the dissolution or merger of 

voting districts, de facto elimination of 

an elected office, and reallocations of 

authority to adopt or administer voting 

practices or procedures are all subject to 

section 5 review. 

One commenter suggested that we 

add the extension of a term of office for 

an elected official as an example of a 

covered change in paragraph (i). We 

concluded that including this example 

would provide additional clarity. To the 

extent that the extension of an elected 

official’s term is a discretionary change 

that affects the next regularly scheduled 

election for that office, there is no 

question that it constitutes a ‘‘change 

affecting voting’’ covered by section 5. 

Additionally, extending the term of a 

particular office affects the ability of 

voters to elect candidates of choice at 

regularly scheduled intervals. 

The commenter also suggested that 

paragraph (k), which provides that 

changes affecting the right or ability of 

persons to participate in ‘‘political 

campaigns’’ are covered under section 5, 

be expanded to include ‘‘campaigns or 

other pre-election activity.’’ We agreed 

that the phrase ‘‘political campaigns,’’ 

without any elaboration, may carry 

partisan connotations not envisioned by 

the statute. Additionally, ‘‘political 

campaigns’’ may not include all preelection activity related to voting, and a 

somewhat broader construction is 

consistent with the broad scope given to 

‘‘changes affecting voting’’ covered 

under section 5. Such changes include 

any ‘‘voting qualification or prerequisite 

to voting or standard, practice, or 

procedure’’ related to the right to vote, 

42 U.S.C. 1973(a), and the Supreme 

Court has recognized that voting 

includes ‘‘all action necessary to make a 

vote effective.’’ Allen v. State Board of 

Elections, 393 U.S. 544, 566 (1969) 

(quoting 42 U.S.C. 1973l). As a result, 

section 5 coverage extends to ‘‘subtle, as 

well as the obvious,’’ changes affecting 

voting. Allen, 393 U.S. at 565. 

Using the phrase ‘‘pre-election 

activity,’’ by itself, however, is too 

general and nebulous. As a result, we 

have revised the paragraph to reflect 

that any change affecting the right or 

ability of persons to participate in preelection activity, such as political 

campaigns, is subject to review under 

section 5. 

Another commenter objected to the 

inclusion of paragraph (l) as an example 

of changes affecting voting, stating that 

this change did not fall within the scope 

of section 5 coverage. A change in the 

voting-related authority of an official or 

governmental entity does alter election 

law and change rules governing voting. 

Thus, such changes meet the test of 

voting relatedness that is at the core of 

the Court’s decision in Presley v. 

Etowah County Commission, 502 U.S. 

491 (1992). In addition, a conclusion 

that such changes are not covered 

arguably would be inconsistent with the 

well-established rule that section 5 

covers state enabling legislation that 

transfers authority to adopt a voting 

change from the state to its 

subjurisdictions. See Allen v. State 

Board of Elections, 393 U.S. 544 (1969) 

(holding that section 5 covered a 

Mississippi statute that granted county 

boards of supervisors the authority to 

change board elections from singlemember districts to at-large voting). 

Section 51.18 Federal Court-Ordered 

Changes 

The purpose of the revisions to this 

section is to clarify the principle that 

section 5 review ordinarily should 

precede other forms of court review, 

that a court-ordered change that initially 

is not subject to section 5 may become 

covered through subsequent actions 

taken by the affected jurisdiction, and 

that the interim use of an covered 

change before it is established that such 

change complies with section 5 should 

be ordered by a court only in emergency 

circumstances. 

One commenter opposed the changes 

contained in the section stating that the 

revisions appear to grant federal courts 

greater authority than the case law 

recognizes to implement voting changes 

that are subject to, but not yet reviewed 

under, section 5 on an emergency basis. 

Although that was not the intent of the 

revisions, we have modified § 51.18(a) 

to clarify that it reflects existing judicial 

precedent. After further consideration, 

we believe that, other than renumbering 

the paragraph as § 51.18(d), it is 

appropriate not to make any change to 

§ 51.18(c) as it currently exists in the 

Procedures. 

Section 51.28 Supplemental Contents 

The proposed revision to paragraph 

(a) was omitted from the June 11, 2010, 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in error. 

The purpose of the revision is to make 

purely technical changes to the format 

in which information may be submitted 

to the Attorney General electronically. 

In addition, since the publication of the 

Notice, the Census Bureau has renamed 

the 15-character geographic identifier 

specified in paragraph (b); the final 

Procedures reflect this change in 

nomenclature. 

Section 51.29 Communications 

Concerning Voting Changes 

The purpose of the revisions to this 

section is to clarify the addresses and 

methods by which persons may provide 

written comments on section 5 

submissions and to clarify the 

circumstances in which the Department 

may withhold the identity of those 

providing comments on section 5 

submissions. 

One commenter objected to the 

nondisclosure of the identity of an 

individual or entity where an assurance 

of confidentiality may reasonably be 

implied from the circumstances of the 

communication. The Department 

believes, however, that communications 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 73 / Friday, April 15, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 21241 

where confidentiality can reasonably be 

implied are within the scope of 

information that ‘‘could reasonably be 

expected to disclose the identity of a 

confidential source.’’ 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(7). 

Accordingly, this determination about 

confidentiality is within the scope of 

Section 552(b) concerning exemptions 

under both the Freedom of Information 

and the Privacy Acts. 

Section 51.37 Obtaining Information 

From the Submitting Authority 

The purpose of the revisions to this 

section is to clarify the procedures for 

the Attorney General to make oral and 

written requests for additional 

information regarding a section 5 

submission. 

One commenter recommended that 

we revise the paragraph concerning oral 

requests to make clear that the Attorney 

General reserves the authority to restart 

the 60-day review period upon receipt 

of material provided in response to the 

Attorney General’s first such request 

made with respect to a submission, and 

that responses to an oral request do not 

affect the running of the 60-day period 

once a written request for information is 

made. 

We declined to amend the proposed 

language regarding responses to an oral 

request because as the Procedures 

currently exist the Attorney General 

may request further information within 

the new 60-day period following the 

receipt of a response from the 

submitting authority to an earlier 

written request, but such a request shall 

not suspend the running the 60-day 

period, nor shall the Attorney General’s 

receipt of such further information 

begin a new 60-day period. Moreover, 

§ 51.39 provides that we may determine 

that information supplied in response to 

an oral request in the initial review 

period materially supplements the 

pending request such that it does extend 

the 60-day period. 

We did conclude, however, on the 

basis of the comment that we received, 

that a reordering of the paragraphs 

would add clarity to the section and 

make it more useful. 

Section 51.40 Failure To Complete 

Submissions 

As described above, the paragraphs of 

§ 51.37 are being reordered. To ensure 

consistency, the reference to § 51.37(a) 

in previous versions of the Procedures 

is amended to § 51.37(b). 

Section 51.48 Decision After 

Reconsideration 

The purpose of the revisions to this 

section is to clarify the manner in which 

the 60-day requirement applies to 

reconsideration requests and revise 

language to conform to the substantive 

section 5 standard in the 2006 

amendments to the Act. 

One commenter objected to the 

revisions in paragraph (a), expressing a 

concern that the revisions permit the 

Attorney General to exceed 60 days for 

the reconsideration of an objection. 

Section 51.48 provides that the 60-day 

reconsideration period may be extended 

to allow a 15-day decision period 

following a conference held pursuant to 

§ 51.47. Moreover, the courts have held 

that when a submitting jurisdiction 

deems its initial submission on a 

reconsideration request to be inadequate 

and decides to supplement it, the 60- 

day period is commenced anew. The 

purpose of this interpretation is to 

provide the Attorney General time to 

give adequate consideration to materials 

submitted in piecemeal fashion. City of 

Rome v. United States, 446 U.S. 156, 

171 (1980). 

Section 51.50 Records Concerning 

Submissions 

The purpose of the revision to this 

section is to clarify the procedures 

regarding access to section 5 records. 

One commenter opposed the changes to 

paragraph (b) and conveyed concerns 

that these changes will result in the 

removal of record keeping with regard 

to objection files. 

Under paragraph (a), the Voting 

Section continues to maintain a section 

5 file for each submission, including 

objection files. Accordingly, all 

appropriate records continue to be 

maintained with regard to all section 5 

submissions. 

Section 51.52 Basic Standard 

The purpose of the revision to this 

section is to clarify the substantive 

standard so as to reflect the 2006 

amendments to the Act and the manner 

in which the Attorney General will 

evaluate submissions under section 5. 

One commenter suggested that 

paragraph (a) be amended further to 

reflect the fact that the Attorney General 

‘‘shall apply the same standard of 

review,’’ instead of ‘‘shall make the same 

determination,’’ that would be made by 

a court in an action for a declaratory 

judgment under section 5. The section 

refers to making a ‘‘determination’’ as 

the activity that both the Attorney 

General and the district court undertake, 

i.e., deciding whether the change 

complies with section 5, as opposed to 

the resulting substantive decision. 

Therefore, we concluded that no further 

revision to the paragraph is warranted. 

Another commentator suggested we 

replace ‘‘purpose and effect’’ with 

‘‘purpose or effect’’ in paragraph (c). 

Although we decided not to incorporate 

the commentator’s exact change, we did 

decide that further refinement of the 

paragraph would provide more clarity. 

Therefore, the paragraph will reflect that 

in those situations where the evidence 

as to the purpose or effect of the change 

is conflicting and the Attorney General 

is unable to determine that the change 

is free of both the prohibited 

discriminatory purpose and effect, the 

Attorney General will interpose an 

objection. Evers v. State Board of 

Election Commissioners, 327 F. Supp. 

640 (S.D. Miss 1971). 

Section 51.54 Discriminatory Purpose 

and Effect 

One commenter suggested various 

minor edits to the proposed language. 

We declined to make these changes. The 

proposed language reflects our extensive 

experience gained over the years in our 

administrative review of section 5 

changes, while avoiding redundancy. 

We did edit the language of paragraph 

(c) to reflect that the statutory language 

refers to a change in a standard, 

practice, or procedure affecting voting, 

not only a practice or procedure. 

Section 51.57(e) Relevant Factors 

One commenter suggested that we 

include ‘‘contemporaneous statements 

and viewpoints held by decisionmakers’’ in the list of relevant factors. 

Such statements are an evidentiary 

source cited by the Court in its opinion 

in Village of Arlington Heights v. 

Metropolitan Housing Development 

Corp., 429 U.S. 252, 268 (1977), and 

therefore we have revised the section to 

reflect the Court’s holding more 

completely. 

Section 51.58(b)(2) Background 

Factors 

One commenter suggested that this 

paragraph be revised to state that 

whether ‘‘election-related activities,’’ 

instead of ‘‘political activities,’’ are 

racially segregated or exclusionary 

constitutes important background 

information when making section 5 

determinations. The proposed 

paragraph provided that the Attorney 

General will consider the ‘‘extent to 

which voting in the jurisdiction is 

racially polarized and political activities 

are racially segregated.’’ Courts in cases 

assessing whether the constitutional 

guarantees afforded to persons to 

exercise the franchise without 

discrimination have been infringed have 

often used the words ‘‘electoral’’ and 

‘‘political’’ as synonyms for each other. 

See, e.g., Harper v. Virginia State Board 

of Elections, 383 U.S. 663, 667–68 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
21242 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 73 / Friday, April 15, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

(1966); see also Johnson v. Miller, 864 F. 

Supp. 1354, 1386–87 (S.D. Ga. 1994) 

(considering a claim under section 2 of 

the Voting Rights Act). These terms are 

similarly synonymous with respect to 

section 5, which also concerns the 

ability of voters to participate in the 

electoral process. After careful 

consideration of the comment, we 

determined that ‘‘election-related 

activities’’ provides greater clarity than 

‘‘political activities’’ and revised the 

section accordingly. 

Section 51.59 Redistricting Plans 

Two commenters recommended 

various additions or deletions to 

paragraph 51.59(a). Because these 

factors are not intended to be 

exhaustive, not all factors are listed. 

Rather, the factors that are listed are 

illustrative, intended to provide 

guidance to jurisdictions regarding 

redistricting plans. 

Other commenters suggested we 

delete or revise certain previously 

existing factors described in the 

paragraph. The Attorney General has, 

however, repeatedly cited factors 

identified in the section in past 

objection letters. Additionally, courts 

have cited ‘‘traditional redistricting 

principles,’’ such as preserving 

recognized communities of interest and 

maintaining political and geographical 

boundaries, as relevant factors in a 

section 5 analysis. Colleton County 

Council v. McConnell, 201 F. Supp. 2d 

618, 647 (D.S.C. 2002) (citing S.C. State 

Conference of Branches of the NAACP 

v. Riley, 533 F. Supp. 1178, 1180 

(D.S.C.), aff’d, 459 U.S. 1025 (1982)). 

See generally Guidance Concerning 

Redistricting Under Section 5 of the 

Voting Rights Act, 76 FR 7470, 7472 

(2011). 

One commenter suggested we amend 

paragraph 51.59(a)(7) to focus on 

whether a proposed plan is inconsistent 

with the jurisdiction’s ‘‘long-held’’ 

redistricting standards, instead of the 

jurisdiction’s ‘‘stated standards.’’ The 

commenter believes that by adding the 

term ‘‘long-held,’’ jurisdictions will be 

discouraged from adopting ad hoc 

redistricting principles to insulate a 

redistricting plan during section 5 

review. The current factors, particularly 

with regards to discriminatory purpose, 

encapsulate scenarios where a 

jurisdiction adopts pretextual or 

unusual redistricting criteria. The 

Procedures should not be interpreted to 

discourage jurisdictions from 

considering traditional redistricting 

principles such as one-person, one-vote, 

or maintaining natural political or 

geographic boundaries, even if they 

have not done so in the past. Bush v. 

Vera, 517 U.S. 952, 980–81 (1996). 

Therefore, we decline to revise these 

factors further. 

Section 51.59(b) Discriminatory 

Purpose 

Several commenters suggested this 

paragraph be revised in the interest of 

clarity. After reviewing the language, we 

agreed that it did not clearly reflect the 

relevant case law on this point and that 

some clarification would be helpful. We 

revised the paragraph accordingly. 

Additional Provisions 

One commenter suggested the 

addition of several provisions related to 

the substantive standards to be 

employed during the review of 

redistricting plans. The proposed 

revisions go beyond the scope of these 

Procedures. 

Administrative Procedure Act 

This rule amends interpretative rules, 

general statements of policy, or rules of 

agency organization, procedure, or 

practice and therefore the notice 

requirement of 5 U.S.C. 553(b) is not 

mandatory. Although notice and 

comment was not required, we 

nonetheless chose to offer the proposed 

rule for notice and comment. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Attorney General, in accordance 

with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 605(b)), has reviewed this rule 

and by approving it certifies that this 

rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities because it 

applies only to governmental entities 

and jurisdictions that are already 

required by section 5 of the Voting 

Rights Act of 1965 to submit voting 

changes to the Department of Justice, 

and this rule does not change this 

requirement. It provides guidance to 

such entities to assist them in making 

the required submissions under section 

5. Further, a Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis was not required to be 

prepared for this rule because the 

Department of Justice was not required 

to publish a general notice of proposed 

rulemaking for this matter. 

Executive Order 12866 

This rule has been drafted and 

reviewed in accordance with Executive 

Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and 

Review,’’ section 1(b), Principles of 

Regulation. The Department of Justice 

has determined that this rule is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

Executive Order 12866, section 3(f), 

Regulatory Planning and Review, and 

accordingly this rule has not been 

reviewed by the Office of Management 

and Budget. The amendments made by 

this rule clarify the scope of section 5 

review based on recent amendments to 

section 5, make certain technical 

clarifications and updates, and provide 

better guidance to covered jurisdictions 

and citizens. In many instances, the 

amendments describe longstanding 

practices of the Attorney General in his 

review of section 5 submissions. 

Executive Order 13132—Federalism 

This rule does not have federalism 

implications warranting the preparation 

of a Federalism Assessment under 

section 6 of Executive Order 13132 

because the rule does not alter or 

modify the existing statutory 

requirements of section 5 of the Voting 

Rights Act imposed on the States, 

including units of local government or 

political subdivisions of the States. 

Executive Order 12988—Civil Justice 

Reform 

This document meets the applicable 

standards set forth in sections 3(a) and 

3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

This rule will not result in the 

expenditure by State, local, and tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector, of $100,000,000 or more 

in any one year, and it will not 

significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. Therefore, no actions are 

necessary under the provisions of the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995. 

List of Subjects in 28 CFR Parts 0 and 

51 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Archives and records, 

Authority delegations (government 

agencies), Civil rights, Elections, 

Political committees and parties, Voting 

rights. 

Accordingly, by virtue of the 

authority vested in me as Attorney 

General, including 5 U.S.C. 301, 28 

U.S.C. 509, 510, and 42 U.S.C. 1973b, 

1973c, the following amendments are 

made to Chapter I of Title 28 of the Code 

of Federal Regulations: 

PART 0—ORGANIZATION OF THE 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

■ 1. The authority citation for Part 0 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 28 U.S.C. 509, 

510. 

Subpart J—Civil Rights Division 

■ 2. In § 0.50, revise paragraph (h) to 

read as follows: 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 73 / Friday, April 15, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 21243 

§ 0.50 General functions. 

* * * * * 

(h) Administration of sections 3(c) 

and 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 

as amended (42 U.S.C. 1973a(c), 1973c). 

* * * * * 

PART 51—PROCEDURES FOR THE 

ADMINISTRATION OF SECTION 5 OF 

THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT OF 1965. 

■ 3. The authority citation for Part 51 is 

revised to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 28 U.S.C. 509, 

510, and 42 U.S.C. 1973b, 1973c. 

■ 4. In § 51.1, revise paragraph (a)(1) to 

read as follows: 

§ 51.1 Purpose. 

(a) * * * 

(1) A declaratory judgment is obtained 

from the U.S. District Court for the 

District of Columbia that such 

qualification, prerequisite, standard, 

practice, or procedure neither has the 

purpose nor will have the effect of 

denying or abridging the right to vote on 

account of race, color, or membership in 

a language minority group, or 

* * * * * 

■ 5. In § 51.2, revise the definition for 

‘‘Act’’; remove the definition of ‘‘Change 

affecting voting’’; and add a new 

definition of ‘‘Change affecting voting or 

change’’ in alphabetical order to read as 

follows: 

§ 51.2 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Act means the Voting Rights Act of 

1965, 79 Stat. 437, as amended by the 

Civil Rights Act of 1968, 82 Stat. 73, the 

Voting Rights Act Amendments of 1970, 

84 Stat. 314, the District of Columbia 

Delegate Act, 84 Stat. 853, the Voting 

Rights Act Amendments of 1975, 89 

Stat. 400, the Voting Rights Act 

Amendments of 1982, 96 Stat. 131, the 

Voting Rights Language Assistance Act 

of 1992, 106 Stat. 921, the Fannie Lou 

Hamer, Rosa Parks, and Coretta Scott 

King Voting Rights Act Reauthorization 

and Amendments Act of 2006, 120 Stat. 

577, and the Act to Revise the Short 

Title of the Fannie Lou Hamer, Rosa 

Parks, and Coretta Scott King Voting 

Rights Act Reauthorization and 

Amendments Act of 2006, 122 Stat. 

2428, 42 U.S.C. 1973 et seq. Section 

numbers, such as ‘‘section 14(c)(3),’’ 

refer to sections of the Act. 

* * * * * 

Change affecting voting or change 

means any voting qualification, 

prerequisite to voting, or standard, 

practice, or procedure with respect to 

voting different from that in force or 

effect on the date used to determine 

coverage under section 4(b) or from the 

existing standard, practice, or procedure 

if it was subsequently altered and 

precleared under section 5. In assessing 

whether a change has a discriminatory 

purpose or effect, the comparison shall 

be with the standard, practice, or 

procedure in effect on the date used to 

determine coverage under section 4(b) 

or the most recent precleared standard, 

practice, or procedure. Some examples 

of changes affecting voting are given in 

§ 51.13. 

* * * * * 

■ 6. Revise § 51.3 to read as follows: 

§ 51.3 Delegation of authority. 

The responsibility and authority for 

determinations under section 5 and 

section 3(c) have been delegated by the 

Attorney General to the Assistant 

Attorney General, Civil Rights Division. 

With the exception of objections and 

decisions following the reconsideration 

of objections, the Chief of the Voting 

Section is authorized to perform the 

functions of the Assistant Attorney 

General. With the concurrence of the 

Assistant Attorney General, the Chief of 

the Voting Section may designate 

supervisory attorneys in the Voting 

Section to perform the functions of the 

Chief. 

■ 7. Revise § 51.5 to read as follows: 

§ 51.5 Termination of coverage. 

(a) Expiration. The requirements of 

section 5 will expire at the end of the 

twenty-five-year period following the 

effective date of the amendments made 

by the Fannie Lou Hamer, Rosa Parks, 

Coretta Scott King, Ce ́sar E. Cha ́vez, 

Barbara C. Jordan, William C. 

Vela ́squez, and Dr. Hector P. Garcia 

Voting Rights Act Reauthorization and 

Amendments Act of 2006 (VRARA), 

which amendments became effective on 

July 27, 2006. See section 4(a)(8) of the 

VRARA. 

(b) Bailout. Any political subunit in a 

covered jurisdiction or a political 

subdivision of a covered State, a 

covered jurisdiction or a political 

subdivision of a covered State, or a 

covered State may terminate the 

application of section 5 (‘‘bailout’’) by 

obtaining the declaratory judgment 

described in section 4(a) of the Act. 

■ 8. Revise § 51.6 to read as follows: 

§ 51.6 Political subunits. 

All political subunits within a 

covered jurisdiction (e.g., counties, 

cities, school districts) that have not 

terminated coverage by obtaining the 

declaratory judgment described in 

section 4(a) of the Act are subject to the 

requirements of section 5. 

■ 9. Revise § 51.9 to read as follows: 

§ 51.9 Computation of time. 

(a) The Attorney General shall have 

60 days in which to interpose an 

objection to a submitted change 

affecting voting for which a response on 

the merits is appropriate (see § 51.35, 

§ 51.37). 

(b) The 60-day period shall commence 

upon receipt of a submission by the 

Voting Section of the Department of 

Justice’s Civil Rights Division or upon 

receipt of a submission by the Office of 

the Assistant Attorney General, Civil 

Rights Division, if the submission is 

properly marked as specified in 

§ 51.24(f). The 60-day period shall 

recommence upon the receipt in like 

manner of a resubmission (see § 51.35), 

information provided in response to a 

written request for additional 

information (see § 51.37(b)), or material, 

supplemental information or a related 

submission (see § 51.39). 

(c) The 60-day period shall mean 60 

calendar days, with the day of receipt of 

the submission not counted, and with 

the 60th day ending at 11:59 p.m. 

Eastern Time of that day. If the final day 

of the period should fall on a Saturday, 

Sunday, or any day designated as a 

holiday by the President or Congress of 

the United States, or any other day that 

is not a day of regular business for the 

Department of Justice, the next full 

business day shall be counted as the 

final day of the 60-day period. The date 

of the Attorney General’s response shall 

be the date on which it is transmitted to 

the submitting authority by any 

reasonable means, including placing it 

in a postbox of the U.S. Postal Service 

or a private mail carrier, sending it by 

telefacsimile, email, or other electronic 

means, or delivering it in person to a 

representative of the submitting 

authority. 

■ 10. In § 51.10, revise paragraph (a) to 

read as follows: 

§ 51.10 Requirement of action for 

declaratory judgment or submission to the 

Attorney General. 

* * * * * 

(a) Obtain a judicial determination 

from the U.S. District Court for the 

District of Columbia that the voting 

change neither has the purpose nor will 

have the effect of denying or abridging 

the right to vote on account of race, 

color, or membership in a language 

minority group. 

* * * * * 

■ 11. Revise § 51.11 to read as follows: 

§ 51.11 Right to bring suit. 

Submission to the Attorney General 

does not affect the right of the 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
21244 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 73 / Friday, April 15, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

submitting authority to bring an action 

in the U.S. District Court for the District 

of Columbia for a declaratory judgment 

that the change affecting voting neither 

has the purpose nor will have the effect 

of denying or abridging the right to vote 

on account of race, color, or 

membership in a language minority 

group. 

■ 12. Revise § 51.12 to read as follows: 

§ 51.12 Scope of requirement. 

Except as provided in § 51.18 (Federal 

court-ordered changes), the section 5 

requirement applies to any change 

affecting voting, even though it appears 

to be minor or indirect, returns to a 

prior practice or procedure, seemingly 

expands voting rights, or is designed to 

remove the elements that caused the 

Attorney General to object to a prior 

submitted change. The scope of section 

5 coverage is based on whether the 

generic category of changes affecting 

voting to which the change belongs (for 

example, the generic categories of 

changes listed in § 51.13) has the 

potential for discrimination. NAACP v. 

Hampton County Election Commission, 

470 U.S. 166 (1985). The method by 

which a jurisdiction enacts or 

administers a change does not affect the 

requirement to comply with section 5, 

which applies to changes enacted or 

administered through the executive, 

legislative, or judicial branches. 

■ 13. In § 51.13, revise paragraphs (e), 

(i), and (k) and add paragraph (l) to read 

as follows: 

§ 51.13 Examples of changes. 

* * * * * 

(e) Any change in the constituency of 

an official or the boundaries of a voting 

unit (e.g., through redistricting, 

annexation, deannexation, 

incorporation, dissolution, merger, 

reapportionment, changing to at-large 

elections from district elections, or 

changing to district elections from atlarge elections). 

* * * * * 

(i) Any change in the term of an 

elective office or an elected official, or 

any change in the offices that are 

elective (e.g., by shortening or extending 

the term of an office; changing from 

election to appointment; transferring 

authority from an elected to an 

appointed official that, in law or in fact, 

eliminates the elected official’s office; or 

staggering the terms of offices). 

* * * * * 

(k) Any change affecting the right or 

ability of persons to participate in preelection activities, such as political 

campaigns. 

(l) Any change that transfers or alters 

the authority of any official or 

governmental entity regarding who may 

enact or seek to implement a voting 

qualification, prerequisite to voting, or 

standard, practice, or procedure with 

respect to voting. 

■ 14. Revise § 51.18 to read as follows: 

§ 51.18 Federal court-ordered changes. 

(a) In general. Changes affecting 

voting for which approval by a Federal 

court is required, or that are ordered by 

a Federal court, are exempt from section 

5 review only where the Federal court 

prepared the change and the change has 

not been subsequently adopted or 

modified by the relevant governmental 

body. McDaniel v. Sanchez, 452 U.S. 

130 (1981). (See also § 51.22.) 

(b) Subsequent changes. Where a 

Federal court-ordered change is not 

itself subject to the preclearance 

requirement, subsequent changes 

necessitated by the court order but 

decided upon by the jurisdiction remain 

subject to preclearance. For example, 

voting precinct and polling changes 

made necessary by a court-ordered 

redistricting plan are subject to section 

5 review. 

(c) Alteration in section 5 status. 

Where a Federal court-ordered change at 

its inception is not subject to review 

under section 5, a subsequent action by 

the submitting authority demonstrating 

that the change reflects its policy 

choices (e.g., adoption or ratification of 

the change, or implementation in a 

manner not explicitly authorized by the 

court) will render the change subject to 

review under section 5 with regard to 

any future implementation. 

(d) In emergencies. A Federal court’s 

authorization of the emergency interim 

use without preclearance of a voting 

change does not exempt from section 5 

review any use of that practice not 

explicitly authorized by the court. 

■ 15. Revise § 51.19 to read as follows: 

§ 51.19 Request for notification 

concerning voting litigation. 

A jurisdiction subject to the 

preclearance requirements of section 5 

that becomes involved in any litigation 

concerning voting is requested to notify 

the Chief, Voting Section, Civil Rights 

Division, at the addresses, telefacsimile 

number, or email address specified in 

§ 51.24. Such notification will not be 

considered a submission under section 

5. 

■ 16. In § 51.20, revise paragraphs (b) 

through (e) and add a new paragraph (f) 

to read as follows: 

§ 51.20 Form of submissions. 

* * * * * 

(b) The Attorney General will accept 

certain machine readable data in the 

following electronic media: 3.5 inch 1.4 

megabyte disk, compact disc read-only 

memory (CD–ROM) formatted to the 

ISO–9660/Joliet standard, or digital 

versatile disc read-only memory (DVD– 

ROM). Unless requested by the Attorney 

General, data provided on electronic 

media need not be provided in hard 

copy. 

(c) All electronic media shall be 

clearly labeled with the following 

information: 

(1) Submitting authority. 

(2) Name, address, title, and 

telephone number of contact person. 

(3) Date of submission cover letter. 

(4) Statement identifying the voting 

change(s) involved in the submission. 

(d) Each magnetic medium (floppy 

disk or tape) provided must be 

accompanied by a printed description of 

its contents, including an identification 

by name or location of each data file 

contained on the medium, a detailed 

record layout for each such file, a record 

count for each such file, and a full 

description of the magnetic medium 

format. 

(e) Text documents should be 

provided in a standard American 

Standard Code for Information 

Interchange (ASCII) character code; 

documents with graphics and complex 

formatting should be provided in 

standard Portable Document Format 

(PDF). The label shall be affixed to each 

electronic medium, and the information 

included on the label shall also be 

contained in a documentation file on 

the electronic medium. 

(f) All data files shall be provided in 

a delimited text file and must include a 

header row as the first row with a name 

for each field in the data set. A separate 

data dictionary file documenting the 

fields in the data set, the field separators 

or delimiters, and a description of each 

field, including whether the field is text, 

date, or numeric, enumerating all 

possible values is required; separators 

and delimiters should not also be used 

as data in the data set. Proprietary or 

commercial software system data files 

(e.g., SAS, SPSS, dBase, Lotus 1–2–3) 

and data files containing compressed 

data or binary data fields will not be 

accepted. 

■ 17. Revise § 51.21 to read as follows: 

§ 51.21 Time of submissions. 

Changes affecting voting should be 

submitted as soon as possible after they 

become final, except as provided in 

§ 51.22. 

■ 18. Revise § 51.22 to read as follows: 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 73 / Friday, April 15, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 21245 

§ 51.22 Submitted changes that will not be 

reviewed. 

(a) The Attorney General will not 

consider on the merits: 

(1) Any proposal for a change 

submitted prior to final enactment or 

administrative decision except as 

provided in paragraph (b) of this 

section. 

(2) Any submitted change directly 

related to another change that has not 

received section 5 preclearance if the 

Attorney General determines that the 

two changes cannot be substantively 

considered independently of one 

another. 

(3) Any submitted change whose 

enforcement has ceased and been 

superseded by a standard, practice, or 

procedure that has received section 5 

preclearance or that is otherwise legally 

enforceable under section 5. 

(b) For any change requiring approval 

by referendum, by a State or Federal 

court, or by a Federal agency, the 

Attorney General may make a 

determination concerning the change 

prior to such approval if the change is 

not subject to alteration in the final 

approving action and if all other action 

necessary for approval has been taken. 

(See also § 51.18.) 

■ 19. Revise § 51.23 to read as follows: 

§ 51.23 Party and jurisdiction responsible 

for making submissions. 

(a) Changes affecting voting shall be 

submitted by the chief legal officer or 

other appropriate official of the 

submitting authority or by any other 

authorized person on behalf of the 

submitting authority. A State, whether 

partially or fully covered, has authority 

to submit any voting change on behalf 

of its covered jurisdictions and political 

subunits. Where a State is covered as a 

whole, State legislation or other changes 

undertaken or required by the State 

shall be submitted by the State (except 

that legislation of local applicability 

may be submitted by political subunits). 

Where a State is partially covered, 

changes of statewide application may be 

submitted by the State. Submissions 

from the State, rather than from the 

individual covered jurisdictions, would 

serve the State’s interest in at least two 

important respects: first, the State is 

better able to explain to the Attorney 

General the purpose and effect of voting 

changes it enacts than are the individual 

covered jurisdictions; second, a single 

submission of the voting change on 

behalf of all of the covered jurisdictions 

would reduce the possibility that some 

State acts will be legally enforceable in 

some parts of the State but not in others. 

(b) A change effected by a political 

party (see § 51.7) may be submitted by 

an appropriate official of the political 

party. 

(c) A change affecting voting that 

results from a State court order should 

be submitted by the jurisdiction or 

entity that is to implement or administer 

the change (in the manner specified by 

paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section). 

■ 20. Revise § 51.24 to read as follows: 

§ 51.24 Delivery of submissions. 

(a) Delivery by U.S. Postal Service. 

Submissions sent to the Attorney 

General by the U.S. Postal Service, 

including certified mail or express mail, 

shall be addressed to the Chief, Voting 

Section, Civil Rights Division, United 

States Department of Justice, Room 

7254–NWB, 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, 

NW, Washington, DC 20530. 

(b) Delivery by other carriers. 

Submissions sent to the Attorney 

General by carriers other than the U.S. 

Postal Service, including by hand 

delivery, should be addressed or may be 

delivered to the Chief, Voting Section, 

Civil Rights Division, United States 

Department of Justice, Room 7254– 

NWB, 1800 G Street, NW, Washington, 

DC 20006. 

(c) Electronic submissions. 

Submissions may be delivered to the 

Attorney General through an electronic 

form available on the website of the 

Voting Section of the Civil Rights 

Division at www.justice.gov/crt/voting/. 

Detailed instructions appear on the 

website. Jurisdictions should answer the 

questions appearing on the electronic 

form, and should attach documents as 

specified in the instructions 

accompanying the application. 

(d) Telefacsimile submissions. In 

urgent circumstances, submissions may 

be delivered to the Attorney General by 

telefacsimile to (202) 616–9514. 

Submissions should not be sent to any 

other telefacsimile number at the 

Department of Justice. Submissions that 

are voluminous should not be sent by 

telefacsimile. 

(e) Email. Submissions may not be 

delivered to the Attorney General by 

email in the first instance. However, 

after a submission is received by the 

Attorney General, a jurisdiction may 

supply additional information on that 

submission by email to 

vot1973c@usdoj.gov. The subject line of 

the email shall be identified with the 

Attorney General’s file number for the 

submission (YYYY–NNNN), marked as 

‘‘Additional Information,’’ and include 

the name of the jurisdiction. 

(f) Special marking. The first page of 

the submission, and the envelope (if 

any), shall be clearly marked: 

‘‘Submission under Section 5 of the 

Voting Rights Act.’’ 

(g) The most current information on 

addresses for, and methods of making, 

section 5 submissions is available on the 

Voting Section website at 

www.justice.gov/crt/voting/. 

■ 21. In § 51.25, revise paragraph (a) to 

read as follows: 

§ 51.25 Withdrawal of submissions. 

(a) A jurisdiction may withdraw a 

submission at any time prior to a final 

decision by the Attorney General. 

Notice of the withdrawal of a 

submission must be made in writing 

addressed to the Chief, Voting Section, 

Civil Rights Division, to be delivered at 

the addresses, telefacsimile number, or 

email address specified in § 51.24. The 

submission shall be deemed withdrawn 

upon the Attorney General’s receipt of 

the notice. 

* * * * * 

■ 22. In § 51.27, revise paragraphs (a) 

through (d) to read as follows: 

§ 51.27 Required contents. 

* * * * * 

(a) A copy of any ordinance, 

enactment, order, or regulation 

embodying the change affecting voting 

for which section 5 preclearance is 

being requested. 

(b) A copy of any ordinance, 

enactment, order, or regulation 

embodying the voting standard, 

practice, or procedure that is proposed 

to be repealed, amended, or otherwise 

changed. 

(c) A statement that identifies with 

specificity each change affecting voting 

for which section 5 preclearance is 

being requested and that explains the 

difference between the submitted 

change and the prior law or practice. If 

the submitted change is a special 

referendum election and the subject of 

the referendum is a proposed change 

affecting voting, the submission should 

specify whether preclearance is being 

requested solely for the special election 

or for both the special election and the 

proposed change to be voted on in the 

referendum (see §§ 51.16, 51.22). 

(d) The name, title, mailing address, 

and telephone number of the person 

making the submission. Where 

available, a telefacsimile number and an 

email address for the person making the 

submission also should be provided. 

* * * * * 

■ 23. In § 51.28, revise paragraph (a)(5), 

add (a)(6), and revise paragraph (c) to 

read as follows: 

§ 51.28 Supplemental contents. 

* * * * * 

(a) * * * 

(5) Demographic data on electronic 

media that are provided in conjunction 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
21246 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 73 / Friday, April 15, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

with a redistricting plan shall be 

contained in an ASCII, comma 

delimited block equivalency import file 

with two fields as detailed in the 

following table. A separate import file 

shall accompany each redistricting plan: 

Field No. Description Total length Comments 

1 ........................ PL94–171 reference number: GEOID10 ................................................................. 15 

2 ........................ District Number ........................................................................................................ 3 No leading zeroes. 

(i) Field 1: The PL 94–171/GEOID10 

reference number is the state, county, 

tract, and block reference numbers 

concatenated together and padded with 

leading zeroes so as to create a 15-digit 

character field; and 

(ii) Field 2: The district number is a 

3 digit character field with no padded 

leading zeroes. 

Example: 482979501002099,1 

482979501002100,3 482979501004301,10 

482975010004305,23 482975010004302,101 

(6) Demographic data on magnetic 

media that are provided in conjunction 

with a redistricting can be provided in 

shapefile (.shp) spatial data format. 

(i) The shapefile shall include at a 

minimum the main file, index file, and 

dBASE table. 

(ii) The dBASE table shall contain a 

row for each census block. Each census 

block will be identified by the state, 

county, tract and block identifier 

[GEOID10] as specified by the Bureau of 

Census. Each row shall identify the 

district assignment and relevant 

population for that specific row. 

(iii) The shapefile should include a 

projection file (.prj). 

(iv) The shapefile should be sent in 

NAD 83 geographic projection. If 

another projection is used, it should be 

described fully. 

* * * * * 

(c) Annexations. For annexations, in 

addition to that information specified 

elsewhere, the following information: 

(1) The present and expected future 

use of the annexed land (e.g., garden 

apartments, industrial park). 

(2) An estimate of the expected 

population, by race and language group, 

when anticipated development, if any, 

is completed. 

(3) A statement that all prior 

annexations (and deannexations) subject 

to the preclearance requirement have 

been submitted for review, or a 

statement that identifies all annexations 

(and deannexations) subject to the 

preclearance requirement that have not 

been submitted for review. See 

§ 51.61(b). 

(4) To the extent that the jurisdiction 

elects some or all members of its 

governing body from single-member 

districts, it should inform the Attorney 

General how the newly annexed 

territory will be incorporated into the 

existing election districts. 

* * * * * 

■ 24. In § 51.29, revise paragraphs (b) 

and (d) to read as follows: 

§ 51.29 Communications concerning 

voting changes. 

* * * * * 

(b) Comments should be sent to the 

Chief, Voting Section, Civil Rights 

Division, at the addresses, telefacsimile 

number, or email address specified in 

§ 51.24. The first page and the envelope 

(if any) should be marked: ‘‘Comment 

under section 5 of the Voting Rights 

Act.’’ Comments should include, where 

available, the name of the jurisdiction 

and the Attorney General’s file number 

(YYYY–NNNN) in the subject line. 

* * * * * 

(d) To the extent permitted by the 

Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 

552, the Attorney General shall not 

disclose to any person outside the 

Department of Justice the identity of any 

individual or entity providing 

information on a submission or the 

administration of section 5 where the 

individual or entity has requested 

confidentiality; an assurance of 

confidentiality may reasonably be 

implied from the circumstances of the 

communication; disclosure could 

reasonably be expected to constitute an 

unwarranted invasion of personal 

privacy under 5 U.S.C. 552; or 

disclosure is prohibited by any 

applicable provisions of federal law. 

* * * * * 

■ 25. Revise § 51.35 to read as follows: 

§ 51.35 Disposition of inappropriate 

submissions and resubmissions. 

(a) When the Attorney General 

determines that a response on the merits 

of a submitted change is inappropriate, 

the Attorney General shall notify the 

submitting official in writing within the 

60-day period that would have 

commenced for a determination on the 

merits and shall include an explanation 

of the reason why a response is not 

appropriate. 

(b) Matters that are not appropriate for 

a merits response include: 

(1) Changes that do not affect voting 

(see § 51.13); 

(2) Standards, practices, or procedures 

that have not been changed (see §§ 51.4, 

51.14); 

(3) Changes that previously have 

received preclearance; 

(4) Changes that affect voting but are 

not subject to the requirement of section 

5 (see § 51.18); 

(5) Changes that have been 

superseded or for which a 

determination is premature (see 

§§ 51.22, 51.61(b)); 

(6) Submissions by jurisdictions not 

subject to the preclearance requirement 

(see §§ 51.4, 51.5); 

(7) Submissions by an inappropriate 

or unauthorized party or jurisdiction 

(see § 51.23); and 

(8) Deficient submissions (see 

§ 51.26(d)). 

(c) Following such a notification by 

the Attorney General, a change shall be 

deemed resubmitted for section 5 

review upon the Attorney General’s 

receipt of a submission or other written 

information that renders the change 

appropriate for review on the merits 

(such as a notification from the 

submitting authority that a change 

previously determined to be premature 

has been formally adopted). Notice of 

the resubmission of a change affecting 

voting will be given to interested parties 

registered under § 51.32. 

■ 26. Revise § 51.37 to read as follows: 

§ 51.37 Obtaining information from the 

submitting authority. 

(a) Oral requests for information. 

(1) If a submission does not satisfy the 

requirements of § 51.27, the Attorney 

General may request orally any omitted 

information necessary for the evaluation 

of the submission. An oral request may 

be made at any time within the 60-day 

period, and the submitting authority 

should provide the requested 

information as promptly as possible. 

The oral request for information shall 

not suspend the running of the 60-day 

period, and the Attorney General will 

proceed to make a determination within 

the initial 60-day period. The Attorney 

General reserves the right as set forth in 

§ 51.39, however, to commence a new 

60-day period in which to make the 

requisite determination if the written 

information provided in response to 

such request materially supplements the 

submission. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 73 / Friday, April 15, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 21247 

(2) An oral request for information 

shall not limit the authority of the 

Attorney General to make a written 

request for information. 

(3) The Attorney General will notify 

the submitting authority in writing 

when the 60-day period for a 

submission is recalculated from the 

Attorney General’s receipt of written 

information provided in response to an 

oral request as described in 

§ 51.37(a)(1), above. 

(4) Notice of the Attorney General’s 

receipt of written information pursuant 

to an oral request will be given to 

interested parties registered under 

§ 51.32. 

(b) Written requests for information. 

(1) If the Attorney General determines 

that a submission does not satisfy the 

requirements of § 51.27, the Attorney 

General may request in writing from the 

submitting authority any omitted 

information necessary for evaluation of 

the submission. Branch v. Smith, 538 

U.S. 254 (2003); Georgia v. United 

States, 411 U.S. 526 (1973). This written 

request shall be made as promptly as 

possible within the original 60-day 

period or the new 60-day period 

described in § 51.39(a). The written 

request shall advise the jurisdiction that 

the submitted change remains 

unenforceable unless and until 

preclearance is obtained. 

(2) A copy of the request shall be sent 

to any party who has commented on the 

submission or has requested notice of 

the Attorney General’s action thereon. 

(3) The Attorney General shall notify 

the submitting authority that a new 60- 

day period in which the Attorney 

General may interpose an objection 

shall commence upon the Attorney 

General’s receipt of a response from the 

submitting authority that provides the 

information requested or states that the 

information is unavailable. The 

Attorney General can request further 

information in writing within the new 

60-day period, but such a further 

request shall not suspend the running of 

the 60-day period, nor shall the 

Attorney General’s receipt of such 

further information begin a new 60-day 

period. 

(4) Where the response from the 

submitting authority neither provides 

the information requested nor states that 

such information is unavailable, the 

response shall not commence a new 60- 

day period. It is the practice of the 

Attorney General to notify the 

submitting authority that its response is 

incomplete and to provide such 

notification as soon as possible within 

the 60-day period that would have 

commenced had the response been 

complete. Where the response includes 

a portion of the available information 

that was requested, the Attorney 

General will reevaluate the submission 

to ascertain whether a determination on 

the merits may be made based upon the 

information provided. If a merits 

determination is appropriate, it is the 

practice of the Attorney General to make 

that determination within the new 60- 

day period that would have commenced 

had the response been complete. See 

§ 51.40. 

(5) If, after a request for further 

information is made pursuant to this 

section, the information requested by 

the Attorney General becomes available 

to the Attorney General from a source 

other than the submitting authority, the 

Attorney General shall promptly notify 

the submitting authority in writing, and 

the new 60-day period will commence 

the day after the information is received 

by the Attorney General. 

(6) Notice of the written request for 

further information and the receipt of a 

response by the Attorney General will 

be given to interested parties registered 

under § 51.32. 

■ 27. Revise § 51.39 to read as follows: 

§ 51.39 Supplemental information and 

related submissions. 

(a)(1) Supplemental information. 

When a submitting authority, at its own 

instance, provides information during 

the 60-day period that the Attorney 

General determines materially 

supplements a pending submission, the 

60-day period for the pending 

submission will be recalculated from 

the Attorney General’s receipt of the 

supplemental information. 

(2) Related submissions. When the 

Attorney General receives related 

submissions during the 60-day period 

for a submission that cannot be 

independently considered, the 60-day 

period for the first submission shall be 

recalculated from the Attorney General’s 

receipt of the last related submission. 

(b) The Attorney General will notify 

the submitting authority in writing 

when the 60-day period for a 

submission is recalculated due to the 

Attorney General’s receipt of 

supplemental information or a related 

submission. 

(c) Notice of the Attorney General’s 

receipt of supplemental information or 

a related submission will be given to 

interested parties registered under 

§ 51.32. 

■ 28. Revise § 51.40 to read as follows: 

§ 51.40 Failure to complete submissions. 

If after 60 days the submitting 

authority has not provided further 

information in response to a request 

made pursuant to § 51.37(b), the 

Attorney General, absent extenuating 

circumstances and consistent with the 

burden of proof under section 5 

described in § 51.52(a) and (c), may 

object to the change, giving notice as 

specified in § 51.44. 

■ 29. Revise § 51.42 to read as follows: 

§ 51.42 Failure of the Attorney General to 

respond. 

It is the practice and intention of the 

Attorney General to respond in writing 

to each submission within the 60-day 

period. However, the failure of the 

Attorney General to make a written 

response within the 60-day period 

constitutes preclearance of the 

submitted change, provided that a 60- 

day review period had commenced after 

receipt by the Attorney General of a 

complete submission that is appropriate 

for a response on the merits. (See 

§ 51.22, § 51.27, § 51.35.) 

■ 30. Revise § 51.43 to read as follows: 

§ 51.43 Reexamination of decision not to 

object. 

(a) After notification to the submitting 

authority of a decision not to interpose 

an objection to a submitted change 

affecting voting has been given, the 

Attorney General may reexamine the 

submission if, prior to the expiration of 

the 60-day period, information comes to 

the attention of the Attorney General 

that would otherwise require objection 

in accordance with section 5. 

(b) In such circumstances, the 

Attorney General may by letter 

withdraw his decision not to interpose 

an objection and may by letter interpose 

an objection provisionally, in 

accordance with § 51.44, and advise the 

submitting authority that examination of 

the change in light of the newly raised 

issues will continue and that a final 

decision will be rendered as soon as 

possible. 

■ 31. In § 51.44, revise paragraph (c) to 

read as follows: 

§ 51.44 Notification of decision to object. 

* * * * * 

(c) The submitting authority shall be 

advised further that notwithstanding the 

objection it may institute an action in 

the U.S. District Court for the District of 

Columbia for a declaratory judgment 

that the change objected to by the 

Attorney General neither has the 

purpose nor will have the effect of 

denying or abridging the right to vote on 

account of race, color, or membership in 

a language minority group. 

* * * * * 

■ 32. In § 51.46, revise paragraph (a) to 

read as follows: 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
21248 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 73 / Friday, April 15, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

§ 51.46 Reconsideration of objection at the 

instance of the Attorney General. 

(a) Where there appears to have been 

a substantial change in operative fact or 

relevant law, or where it appears there 

may have been a misinterpretation of 

fact or mistake in the law, an objection 

may be reconsidered, if it is deemed 

appropriate, at the instance of the 

Attorney General. 

* * * * * 

■ 33. In § 51.48, revise paragraphs (a) 

through (d) to read as follows: 

§ 51.48 Decision after reconsideration. 

(a) It is the practice of the Attorney 

General to notify the submitting 

authority of the decision to continue or 

withdraw an objection within a 60-day 

period following receipt of a 

reconsideration request or following 

notice given under § 51.46(b), except 

that this 60-day period shall be 

recommenced upon receipt of any 

documents or written information from 

the submitting authority that materially 

supplements the reconsideration 

review, irrespective of whether the 

submitting authority provides the 

documents or information at its own 

instance or pursuant to a request 

(written or oral) by the Attorney 

General. The 60-day reconsideration 

period may be extended to allow a 15- 

day decision period following a 

conference held pursuant to § 51.47. 

The 60-day reconsideration period shall 

be computed in the manner specified in 

§ 51.9. Where the reconsideration is at 

the instance of the Attorney General, the 

first day of the period shall be the day 

after the notice required by § 51.46(b) is 

transmitted to the submitting authority. 

The reasons for the reconsideration 

decision shall be stated. 

(b) The objection shall be withdrawn 

if the Attorney General is satisfied that 

the change neither has the purpose nor 

will have the effect of denying or 

abridging the right to vote on account of 

race, color, or membership in a language 

minority group. 

(c) If the objection is not withdrawn, 

the submitting authority shall be 

advised that notwithstanding the 

objection it may institute an action in 

the U.S. District Court for the District of 

Columbia for a declaratory judgment 

that the change objected to by the 

Attorney General neither has the 

purpose nor will have the effect of 

denying or abridging the right to vote on 

account of race, color, or membership in 

a language minority group. 

(d) An objection remains in effect 

until either it is specifically withdrawn 

by the Attorney General or a declaratory 

judgment with respect to the change in 

question is entered by the U.S. District 

Court for the District of Columbia. 

* * * * * 

■ 34. Revise § 51.50 to read as follows: 

§ 51.50 Records concerning submissions. 

(a) Section 5 files. The Attorney 

General shall maintain a section 5 file 

for each submission, containing the 

submission, related written materials, 

correspondence, memoranda, 

investigative reports, data provided on 

electronic media, notations concerning 

conferences with the submitting 

authority or any interested individual or 

group, and copies of letters from the 

Attorney General concerning the 

submission. 

(b) Objection letters. The Attorney 

General shall maintain section 5 

notification letters regarding decisions 

to interpose, continue, or withdraw an 

objection. 

(c) Computer file. Records of all 

submissions and their dispositions by 

the Attorney General shall be 

electronically stored. 

(d) Copies. The contents of the section 

5 submission files in paper, microfiche, 

electronic, or other form shall be 

available for obtaining copies by the 

public, pursuant to written request 

directed to the Chief, Voting Section, 

Civil Rights Division, United States 

Department of Justice, Washington, DC. 

Such written request may be delivered 

to the addresses or telefacsimile number 

specified in § 51.24 or by electronic 

mail to Voting.Section@usdoj.gov. It is 

the Attorney General’s intent and 

practice to expedite, to the extent 

possible, requests pertaining to pending 

submissions. Those who desire copies 

of information that has been provided 

on electronic media will be provided a 

copy of that information in the same 

form as it was received. Materials that 

are exempt from inspection under the 

Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 

552(b), may be withheld at the 

discretion of the Attorney General. The 

identity of any individual or entity that 

provided information to the Attorney 

General regarding the administration of 

section 5 shall be available only as 

provided by § 51.29(d). Applicable fees, 

if any, for the copying of the contents 

of these files are contained in the 

Department of Justice regulations 

implementing the Freedom of 

Information Act, 28 CFR 16.10. 

■ 35. Revise § 51.52 to read as follows: 

§ 51.52 Basic standard. 

(a) Surrogate for the court. Section 5 

provides for submission of a voting 

change to the Attorney General as an 

alternative to the seeking of a 

declaratory judgment from the U.S. 

District Court for the District of 

Columbia. Therefore, the Attorney 

General shall make the same 

determination that would be made by 

the court in an action for a declaratory 

judgment under section 5: whether the 

submitted change neither has the 

purpose nor will have the effect of 

denying or abridging the right to vote on 

account of race, color, or membership in 

a language minority group. The burden 

of proof is on a submitting authority 

when it submits a change to the 

Attorney General for preclearance, as it 

would be if the proposed change were 

the subject of a declaratory judgment 

action in the U.S. District Court for the 

District of Columbia. South Carolina v. 

Katzenbach, 383 U.S. 301, 328, 335 

(1966). 

(b) No objection. If the Attorney 

General determines that the submitted 

change neither has the purpose nor will 

have the effect of denying or abridging 

the right to vote on account of race, 

color, or membership in a language 

minority group, no objection shall be 

interposed to the change. 

(c) Objection. An objection shall be 

interposed to a submitted change if the 

Attorney General is unable to determine 

that the change neither has the purpose 

nor will have the effect of denying or 

abridging the right to vote on account of 

race, color, or membership in a language 

minority group. This includes those 

situations where the evidence as to the 

purpose or effect of the change is 

conflicting and the Attorney General is 

unable to determine that the change is 

free of both the prohibited 

discriminatory purpose and effect. 

■ 36. Revise § 51.54 to read as follows: 

§ 51.54 Discriminatory purpose and effect. 

(a) Discriminatory purpose. A change 

affecting voting is considered to have a 

discriminatory purpose under section 5 

if it is enacted or sought to be 

administered with any purpose of 

denying or abridging the right to vote on 

account of race, color, or membership in 

a language minority group. The term 

‘‘purpose’’ in section 5 includes any 

discriminatory purpose. 42 U.S.C. 

1973c. The Attorney General’s 

evaluation of discriminatory purpose 

under section 5 is guided by the 

analysis in Village of Arlington Heights 

v. Metropolitan Housing Development 

Corp., 429 U.S. 252 (1977). 

(b) Discriminatory effect. A change 

affecting voting is considered to have a 

discriminatory effect under section 5 if 

it will lead to a retrogression in the 

position of members of a racial or 

language minority group (i.e., will make 

members of such a group worse off than 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 73 / Friday, April 15, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 21249 

they had been before the change) with 

respect to their effective exercise of the 

electoral franchise. Beer v. United 

States, 425 U.S. 130, 140–42 (1976). 

(c) Benchmark. (1) In determining 

whether a submitted change is 

retrogressive the Attorney General will 

normally compare the submitted change 

to the voting standard, practice, or 

procedure in force or effect at the time 

of the submission. If the existing 

standard, practice, or procedure upon 

submission was not in effect on the 

jurisdiction’s applicable date for 

coverage (specified in the Appendix) 

and is not otherwise legally enforceable 

under section 5, it cannot serve as a 

benchmark, and, except as provided in 

paragraph (c)(4) of this section, the 

comparison shall be with the last legally 

enforceable standard, practice, or 

procedure used by the jurisdiction. 

(2) The Attorney General will make 

the comparison based on the conditions 

existing at the time of the submission. 

(3) The implementation and use of an 

unprecleared voting change subject to 

section 5 review does not operate to 

make that unprecleared change a 

benchmark for any subsequent change 

submitted by the jurisdiction. 

(4) Where at the time of submission of 

a change for section 5 review there 

exists no other lawful standard, 

practice, or procedure for use as a 

benchmark (e.g., where a newly 

incorporated college district selects a 

method of election) the Attorney 

General’s determination will necessarily 

center on whether the submitted change 

was designed or adopted for the purpose 

of discriminating against members of 

racial or language minority groups. 

(d) Protection of the ability to elect. 

Any change affecting voting that has the 

purpose of or will have the effect of 

diminishing the ability of any citizens of 

the United States on account of race, 

color, or membership in a language 

minority group to elect their preferred 

candidates of choice denies or abridges 

the right to vote within the meaning of 

section 5. 42 U.S.C. 1973c. 

■ 37. In § 51.55, revise paragraph (a) to 

read as follows: 

§ 51.55 Consistency with constitutional 

and statutory requirements. 

(a) Consideration in general. In 

making a determination under section 5, 

the Attorney General will consider 

whether the change neither has the 

purpose nor will have the effect of 

denying or abridging the right to vote on 

account of race, color, or membership in 

a language minority group in light of, 

and with particular attention being 

given to, the requirements of the 14th, 

15th, and 24th Amendments to the 

Constitution, 42 U.S.C. 1971(a) and (b), 

sections 2, 4(a), 4(f)(2), 4(f)(4), 201, 

203(c), and 208 of the Act, and other 

constitutional and statutory provisions 

designed to safeguard the right to vote 

from denial or abridgment on account of 

race, color, or membership in a language 

minority group. 

* * * * * 

■ 38. Revise § 51.57 to read as follows: 

§ 51.57 Relevant factors. 

Among the factors the Attorney 

General will consider in making 

determinations with respect to the 

submitted changes affecting voting are 

the following: 

(a) The extent to which a reasonable 

and legitimate justification for the 

change exists; 

(b) The extent to which the 

jurisdiction followed objective 

guidelines and fair and conventional 

procedures in adopting the change; 

(c) The extent to which the 

jurisdiction afforded members of racial 

and language minority groups an 

opportunity to participate in the 

decision to make the change; 

(d) The extent to which the 

jurisdiction took the concerns of 

members of racial and language 

minority groups into account in making 

the change; and 

(e) The factors set forth in Village of 

Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan 

Housing Development Corp., 429 U.S. 

252 (1977): 

(1) Whether the impact of the official 

action bears more heavily on one race 

than another; 

(2) The historical background of the 

decision; 

(3) The specific sequence of events 

leading up to the decision; 

(4) Whether there are departures from 

the normal procedural sequence; 

(5) Whether there are substantive 

departures from the normal factors 

considered; and 

(6) The legislative or administrative 

history, including contemporaneous 

statements made by the decision 

makers. 

■ 39. In § 51.58, revise paragraph (b) to 

read as follows: 

§ 51.58 Representation. 

* * * * * 

(b) Background factors. In making 

determinations with respect to these 

changes involving voting practices and 

procedures, the Attorney General will 

consider as important background 

information the following factors: 

(1) The extent to which minorities 

have been denied an equal opportunity 

to participate meaningfully in the 

political process in the jurisdiction. 

(2) The extent to which voting in the 

jurisdiction is racially polarized and 

election-related activities are racially 

segregated. 

(3) The extent to which the voter 

registration and election participation of 

minority voters have been adversely 

affected by present or past 

discrimination. 

■ 40. Revise § 51.59 to read as follows: 

§ 51.59 Redistricting plans. 

(a) Relevant factors. In determining 

whether a submitted redistricting plan 

has a prohibited purpose or effect the 

Attorney General, in addition to the 

factors described above, will consider 

the following factors (among others): 

(1) The extent to which 

malapportioned districts deny or 

abridge the right to vote of minority 

citizens; 

(2) The extent to which minority 

voting strength is reduced by the 

proposed redistricting; 

(3) The extent to which minority 

concentrations are fragmented among 

different districts; 

(4) The extent to which minorities are 

over concentrated in one or more 

districts; 

(5) The extent to which available 

alternative plans satisfying the 

jurisdiction’s legitimate governmental 

interests were considered; 

(6) The extent to which the plan 

departs from objective redistricting 

criteria set by the submitting 

jurisdiction, ignores other relevant 

factors such as compactness and 

contiguity, or displays a configuration 

that inexplicably disregards available 

natural or artificial boundaries; and 

(7) The extent to which the plan is 

inconsistent with the jurisdiction’s 

stated redistricting standards. 

(b) Discriminatory purpose. A 

jurisdiction’s failure to adopt the 

maximum possible number of majorityminority districts may not be the sole 

basis for determining that a jurisdiction 

was motivated by a discriminatory 

purpose. 

■ 41. In § 51.61, revise paragraphs (a) 

and (b) to read as follows: 

§ 51.61 Annexations and deannexations. 

(a) Coverage. Annexations and 

deannexations, even of uninhabited 

land, are subject to section 5 

preclearance to the extent that they alter 

or are calculated to alter the 

composition of a jurisdiction’s 

electorate. See, e.g., City of Pleasant 

Grove v. United States, 479 U.S. 462 

(1987). In analyzing annexations and 

deannexations under section 5, the 

Attorney General considers the purpose 

and effect of the annexations and 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
21250 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 73 / Friday, April 15, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

deannexations only as they pertain to 

voting. 

(b) Section 5 review. It is the practice 

of the Attorney General to review all of 

a jurisdiction’s unprecleared 

annexations and deannexations 

together. See City of Pleasant Grove v. 

United States, C.A. No. 80–2589 (D.D.C. 

Oct. 7, 1981). 

* * * * * 

■ 42. Revise the Appendix to Part 51 to 

read as follows: 

Appendix to Part 51—Jurisdictions 

Covered Under Section 4(b) of the 

Voting Rights Act, as Amended 

The requirements of section 5 of the Voting 

Rights Act, as amended, apply in the 

following jurisdictions. The applicable date 

is the date that was used to determine 

coverage and the date after which changes 

affecting voting are subject to the 

preclearance requirement. Some 

jurisdictions, for example, Yuba County, 

California, are included more than once 

because they have been determined on more 

than one occasion to be covered under 

section 4(b). 

Jurisdiction Applicable date 

Federal Register citation 

Volume and page Date 

Alabama ................................................................................ Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 30 FR 9897 ........................... Aug. 7, 1965. 

Alaska ................................................................................... Nov. 1, 1972 ......................... 40 FR 49422 ......................... Oct. 22, 1975. 

Arizona .................................................................................. Nov. 1, 1972 ......................... 40 FR 43746 ......................... Sept. 23, 1975. 

California: 

Kings County ................................................................. Nov. 1, 1972 ......................... 40 FR 43746 ......................... Sept. 23, 1975. 

Merced County .............................................................. Nov. 1, 1972 ......................... 40 FR 43746 ......................... Sept. 23, 1975. 

Monterey County ........................................................... Nov. 1, 1968 ......................... 36 FR 5809 ........................... Mar. 27, 1971. 

Yuba County .................................................................. Nov. 1, 1968 ......................... 36 FR 5809 ........................... Mar. 27, 1971. 

Yuba County .................................................................. Nov. 1, 1972 ......................... 41 FR 784 ............................. Jan. 5, 1976. 

Florida: 

Collier County ................................................................ Nov. 1, 1972 ......................... 41 FR 34329 ......................... Aug. 13, 1976. 

Hardee County ............................................................... Nov. 1, 1972 ......................... 40 FR 43746 ......................... Sept. 23, 1975. 

Hendry County ............................................................... Nov. 1, 1972 ......................... 41 FR 34329 ......................... Aug. 13, 1976. 

Hillsborough County ...................................................... Nov. 1, 1972 ......................... 40 FR 43746 ......................... Sept. 23, 1975. 

Monroe County .............................................................. Nov. 1, 1972 ......................... 40 FR 43746 ......................... Sept. 23, 1975. 

Georgia ................................................................................. Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 30 FR 9897 ........................... Aug. 7, 1965. 

Louisiana ............................................................................... Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 30 FR 9897 ........................... Aug. 7, 1965. 

Michigan: 

Allegan County: 

Clyde Township ...................................................... Nov. 1, 1972 ......................... 41 FR 34329 ......................... Aug. 13, 1976. 

Saginaw County: 

Buena Vista Township ............................................ Nov. 1, 1972 ......................... 41 FR 34329 ......................... Aug. 13, 1976. 

Mississippi ............................................................................. Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 30 FR 9897 ........................... Aug. 7, 1965. 

New Hampshire: 

Cheshire County: 

Rindge Town .......................................................... Nov. 1, 1968 ......................... 39 FR 16912 ......................... May 10, 1974. 

Coos County: 

Millsfield Township ................................................. Nov. 1, 1968 ......................... 39 FR 16912 ......................... May 10, 1974. 

Pinkhams Grant ...................................................... Nov. 1, 1968 ......................... 39 FR 16912 ......................... May 10, 1974 

Stewartstown Town ................................................ Nov. 1, 1968 ......................... 39 FR 16912 ......................... May 10, 1974. 

Stratford Town ........................................................ Nov. 1, 1968 ......................... 39 FR 16912 ......................... May 10, 1974. 

Grafton County: 

Benton Town .......................................................... Nov. 1, 1968 ......................... 39 FR 16912 ......................... May 10, 1974. 

Hillsborough County: 

Antrim Town ........................................................... Nov. 1, 1968 ......................... 39 FR 16912 ......................... May 10, 1974. 

Merrimack County: 

Boscawen Town ..................................................... Nov. 1, 1968 ......................... 39 FR 16912 ......................... May 10, 1974. 

Rockingham County: 

Newington Town ..................................................... Nov. 1, 1968 ......................... 39 FR 16912 ......................... May 10, 1974. 

Sullivan County: 

Unity Town .............................................................. Nov. 1, 1968 ......................... 39 FR 16912 ......................... May 10, 1974. 

New York: 

Bronx County ................................................................. Nov. 1, 1968 ......................... 36 FR 5809 ........................... Mar. 27, 1971. 

Bronx County ................................................................. Nov. 1, 1972 ......................... 40 FR 43746 ......................... Sept. 23, 1975. 

Kings County ................................................................. Nov. 1, 1968 ......................... 36 FR 5809 ........................... Mar. 27, 1971. 

Kings County ................................................................. Nov. 1, 1972 ......................... 40 FR 43746 ......................... Sept. 23, 1975. 

New York County ........................................................... Nov. 1, 1968 ......................... 36 FR 5809 ........................... Mar. 27, 1971. 

North Carolina: 

Anson County ................................................................ Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 30 FR 9897 ........................... Aug. 7, 1965. 

Beaufort County ............................................................. Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 31 FR 5081 ........................... Mar. 29, 1966. 

Bertie County ................................................................. Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 30 FR 9897 ........................... Aug. 7, 1965. 

Bladen County ............................................................... Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 31 FR 5081 ........................... Mar. 29, 1966. 

Camden County ............................................................. Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 31 FR 3317 ........................... Mar. 2, 1966. 

Caswell County .............................................................. Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 30 FR 9897 ........................... Aug. 7, 1965. 

Chowan County ............................................................. Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 30 FR 9897 ........................... Aug. 7, 1965. 

Cleveland County .......................................................... Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 31 FR 5081 ........................... Mar. 29, 1966. 

Craven County ............................................................... Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 30 FR 9897 ........................... Aug. 7, 1965. 

Cumberland County ....................................................... Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 30 FR 9897 ........................... Aug. 7, 1965. 

Edgecombe County ....................................................... Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 30 FR 9897 ........................... Aug. 7, 1965. 

Franklin County .............................................................. Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 30 FR 9897 ........................... Aug. 7, 1965. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 73 / Friday, April 15, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 21251 

Jurisdiction Applicable date 

Federal Register citation 

Volume and page Date 

Gaston County ............................................................... Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 31 FR 5081 ........................... Mar. 29, 1966. 

Gates County ................................................................. Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 30 FR 9897 ........................... Aug. 7, 1965. 

Granville County ............................................................ Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 30 FR 9897 ........................... Aug. 7, 1965. 

Greene County .............................................................. Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 30 FR 9897 ........................... Aug. 7, 1965. 

Guilford County .............................................................. Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 31 FR 5081 ........................... Mar. 29, 1966. 

Halifax County ............................................................... Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 30 FR 9897 ........................... Aug. 7, 1965. 

Harnett County ............................................................... Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 31 FR 5081 ........................... Mar. 29, 1966. 

Hertford County ............................................................. Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 30 FR 9897 ........................... Aug. 7, 1965. 

Hoke County .................................................................. Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 30 FR 9897 ........................... Aug. 7, 1965. 

Jackson County ............................................................. Nov. 1, 1972 ......................... 40 FR 49422 ......................... Oct. 22, 1975. 

Lee County .................................................................... Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 31 FR 5081 ........................... Mar. 29, 1966. 

Lenoir County ................................................................ Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 30 FR 9897 ........................... Aug. 7, 1965. 

Martin County ................................................................ Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 31 FR 19 ............................... Jan. 4, 1966. 

Nash County .................................................................. Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 30 FR 9897 ........................... Aug. 7, 1965. 

Northampton County ...................................................... Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 30 FR 9897 ........................... Aug. 7, 1965. 

Onslow County .............................................................. Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 30 FR 9897 ........................... Aug. 7, 1965. 

Pasquotank County ....................................................... Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 30 FR 9897 ........................... Aug. 7, 1965. 

Perquimans County ....................................................... Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 31 FR 3317 ........................... Mar. 2, 1966. 

Person County ............................................................... Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 30 FR 9897 ........................... Aug. 7, 1965. 

Pitt County ..................................................................... Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 30 FR 9897 ........................... Aug. 7, 1965. 

Robeson County ............................................................ Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 30 FR 9897 ........................... Aug. 7, 1965. 

Rockingham County ...................................................... Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 31 FR 5081 ........................... Mar. 29, 1966. 

Scotland County ............................................................ Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 30 FR 9897 ........................... Aug. 7, 1965. 

Union County ................................................................. Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 31 FR 5081 ........................... Mar. 29, 1966. 

Vance County ................................................................ Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 30 FR 9897 ........................... Aug. 7, 1965. 

Washington County ....................................................... Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 31 FR 19 ............................... Jan. 4, 1966. 

Wayne County ............................................................... Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 30 FR 9897 ........................... Aug. 7, 1965. 

Wilson County ................................................................ Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 30 FR 9897 ........................... Aug. 7, 1965. 

South Carolina ...................................................................... Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 30 FR 9897 ........................... Aug. 7, 1965. 

South Dakota: 

Shannon County ............................................................ Nov. 1, 1972 ......................... 41 FR 784 ............................. Jan. 5, 1976. 

Todd County .................................................................. Nov. 1, 1972 ......................... 41 FR 784 ............................. Jan. 5, 1976. 

Texas .................................................................................... Nov. 1, 1972 ......................... 40 FR 43746 ......................... Sept. 23, 1975. 

Virginia .................................................................................. Nov. 1, 1964 ......................... 30 FR 9897 ........................... Aug. 7, 1965. 

The following political subdivisions in 

States subject to statewide coverage are also 

covered individually: 

Jurisdiction Applicable date 

Federal Register citation 

Volume and page Date 

Arizona: 

Apache County .............................................................. Nov. 1, 1968 ......................... 36 FR 5809 ........................... Mar. 27, 1971. 

Apache County .............................................................. Nov. 1, 1972 ......................... 40 FR 49422 ......................... Oct. 22, 1975. 

Cochise County ............................................................. Nov. 1, 1968 ......................... 36 FR 5809 ........................... Mar. 27, 1971 

Coconino County ........................................................... Nov. 1, 1968 ......................... 36 FR 5809 ........................... Mar. 27, 1971. 

Coconino County ........................................................... Nov. 1, 1972 ......................... 40 FR 49422 ......................... Oct. 22, 1975. 

Mohave County .............................................................. Nov. 1, 1968 ......................... 36 FR 5809 ........................... Mar. 27, 1971. 

Navajo County ............................................................... Nov. 1, 1968 ......................... 36 FR 5809 ........................... Mar. 27, 1971. 

Navajo County ............................................................... Nov. 1, 1972 ......................... 40 FR 49422 ......................... Oct. 22, 1975. 

Pima County .................................................................. Nov. 1, 1968 ......................... 36 FR 5809 ........................... Mar. 27, 1971. 

Pinal County .................................................................. Nov. 1, 1968 ......................... 36 FR 5809 ........................... Mar. 27, 1971. 

Pinal County .................................................................. Nov. 1, 1972 ......................... 40 FR 49422 ......................... Oct. 22, 1975. 

Santa Cruz County ........................................................ Nov. 1, 1968 ......................... 36 FR 5809 ........................... Mar. 27, 1971. 

Yuma County ................................................................. Nov. 1, 1964. ........................ 31 FR 982 ............................. Jan. 25, 1966. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
21252 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 73 / Friday, April 15, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

1Appendix B to PBGC’s regulation on Allocation 

of Assets in Single-Employer Plans (29 CFR part 

4044) prescribes interest assumptions for valuing 

benefits under terminating covered single-employer 

plans for purposes of allocation of assets under 

ERISA section 4044. Those assumptions are 

updated quarterly. 

The Voting Section maintains a current list 

of those jurisdictions that have maintained 

successful declaratory judgments from the 

United States District Court for the District of 

Columbia pursuant to section 4 of the Act on 

its Web site at http://www.justice.gov/crt/ 

voting. 

Dated: April 8, 2011. 

Eric H. Holder, Jr., 

Attorney General. 

[FR Doc. 2011–9083 Filed 4–14–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–13–P 

PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY 

CORPORATION 

29 CFR Part 4022 

Benefits Payable in Terminated SingleEmployer Plans; Interest Assumptions 

for Paying Benefits 

AGENCY: Pension Benefit Guaranty 

Corporation. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This final rule amends 

Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation’s 

regulation on Benefits Payable in 

Terminated Single-Employer Plans to 

prescribe interest assumptions under 

the regulation for valuation dates in 

May 2011. PBGC’s regulation on 

Benefits Payable in Terminated SingleEmployer Plans prescribes actuarial 

assumptions—including interest 

assumptions—for paying plan benefits 

under terminating single-employer 

plans covered by title IV of the 

Employee Retirement Income Security 

Act of 1974. 

DATES: Effective May 1, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Catherine B. Klion, Manager, Regulatory 

and Policy Division, Legislative and 

Regulatory Department, Pension Benefit 

Guaranty Corporation, 1200 K Street, 

NW., Washington, DC 20005, 202–326– 

4024. (TTY/TDD users may call the 

Federal relay service toll-free at 1–800– 

877–8339 and ask to be connected to 

202–326–4024.) 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Interest 

assumptions are also published on 

PBGC’s Web site (http://www.pbgc.gov). 

PBGC’s regulation on Benefits Payable 

in Terminated Single-Employer Plans 

(29 CFR Part 4022) prescribes actuarial 

assumptions—including interest 

assumptions—for paying plan benefits 

under terminating single-employer 

plans covered by title IV of the 

Employee Retirement Income Security 

Act of 1974. 

PBGC uses the interest assumptions in 

Appendix B to Part 4022 to determine 

whether a benefit is payable as a lump 

sum and to determine the amount to 

pay. Appendix C to Part 4022 contains 

interest assumptions for private-sector 

pension practitioners to refer to if they 

wish to use lump-sum interest rates 

determined using PBGC’s historical 

methodology. Currently, the rates in 

Appendices B and C of the benefit 

payment regulation are the same. 

The interest assumptions are intended 

to reflect current conditions in the 

financial and annuity markets. 

Assumptions under the benefit 

payments regulation are updated 

monthly. This final rule updates the 

benefit payments interest assumptions 

for May 2011.1

The May 2011 interest assumptions 

under the benefit payments regulation 

will be 2.50 percent for the period 

during which a benefit is in pay status 

and 4.00 percent during any years 

preceding the benefit’s placement in pay 

status. In comparison with the interest 

assumptions in effect for April 2011, 

these interest assumptions are 

unchanged. 

PBGC has determined that notice and 

public comment on this amendment are 

impracticable and contrary to the public 

interest. This finding is based on the 

need to determine and issue new 

interest assumptions promptly so that 

the assumptions can reflect current 

market conditions as accurately as 

possible. 

Because of the need to provide 

immediate guidance for the payment of 

benefits under plans with valuation 

dates during May 2011, PBGC finds that 

good cause exists for making the 

assumptions set forth in this 

amendment effective less than 30 days 

after publication. 

PBGC has determined that this action 

is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ 

under the criteria set forth in Executive 

Order 12866. 

Because no general notice of proposed 

rulemaking is required for this 

amendment, the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act of 1980 does not apply. See 5 U.S.C. 

601(2). 

List of Subjects in 29 CFR Part 4022 

Employee benefit plans, Pension 

insurance, Pensions, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

In consideration of the foregoing, 29 

CFR part 4022 is amended as follows: 

PART 4022—BENEFITS PAYABLE IN 

TERMINATED SINGLE-EMPLOYER 

PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 4022 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 29 U.S.C. 1302, 1322, 1322b, 

1341(c)(3)(D), and 1344. 

■ 2. In appendix B to part 4022, Rate Set 

211, as set forth below, is added to the 

table. 

Appendix B to Part 4022—Lump Sum 

Interest Rates for PBGC Payments 

* * * * * 

Rate set 

For plans with a valuation 

date Immediate 

annuity rate 

(percent) 

Deferred annuities 

(percent) 

On or after Before i1 i2 i3 n1 n2

*******

211 5–1–11 6–1–11 2.50 4.00 4.00 4.00 7 8 

■ 3. In appendix C to part 4022, Rate Set 

211, as set forth below, is added to the 

table. 

Appendix C to Part 4022—Lump Sum 

Interest Rates for Private-Sector 

Payments 

* * * * * 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES